Star Trek: Into Darkness

This forum is for discussing Chuck's videos as they are publicly released. And for bashing Neelix, but that's just repeating what I already said.
Post Reply
User avatar
BridgeConsoleMasher
Overlord
Posts: 11517
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by BridgeConsoleMasher »

Makeshift Python wrote: Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:05 pm It's funny how Spock is telling Kirk not to come and rescue him so not to "violate" the PD, while he was already doing that anyway by setting the ice bomb in that volcano.
I thought the Prime Directive was mainly concerned with the inhabitants not knowing about the federation. It's about not influencing a change in their societal development.
Power laces... alright.
User avatar
Makeshift Python
Captain
Posts: 1592
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 2:37 pm

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by Makeshift Python »

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:32 pm
Makeshift Python wrote: Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:05 pm It's funny how Spock is telling Kirk not to come and rescue him so not to "violate" the PD, while he was already doing that anyway by setting the ice bomb in that volcano.
I thought the Prime Directive was mainly concerned with the inhabitants not knowing about the federation. It's about not influencing a change in their societal development.
Pike basically takes the Picard stance over Kirk's decisions with the volcano.

"You were supposed to survey a planet, not alter it's destiny."
User avatar
CharlesPhipps
Captain
Posts: 4700
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:06 pm

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by CharlesPhipps »

Makeshift Python wrote: Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:05 pm It's funny how Spock is telling Kirk not to come and rescue him so not to "violate" the PD, while he was already doing that anyway by setting the ice bomb in that volcano.
Star Trek was always actually fairly consistent that Captains had a lot of leeway to do what they needed or felt was right. The big issue I saw here was that Kirk altered his logs, which meant he was trying to deceive his superiors.

I'm inclined to think Marcus wouldn't give a shit normally or at least it would be a wrist slapping offense.
User avatar
Makeshift Python
Captain
Posts: 1592
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 2:37 pm

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by Makeshift Python »

You mean Pike?
User avatar
CharlesPhipps
Captain
Posts: 4700
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:06 pm

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by CharlesPhipps »

No, Pike is very clearly of the mind Kirk should have followed the PD.
User avatar
BridgeConsoleMasher
Overlord
Posts: 11517
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by BridgeConsoleMasher »

Makeshift Python wrote: Tue Dec 25, 2018 1:32 am
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:32 pm
Makeshift Python wrote: Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:05 pm It's funny how Spock is telling Kirk not to come and rescue him so not to "violate" the PD, while he was already doing that anyway by setting the ice bomb in that volcano.
I thought the Prime Directive was mainly concerned with the inhabitants not knowing about the federation. It's about not influencing a change in their societal development.
Pike basically takes the Picard stance over Kirk's decisions with the volcano.

"You were supposed to survey a planet, not alter it's destiny."
FINE
Power laces... alright.
User avatar
SabreMau
Officer
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:00 am

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by SabreMau »

And now, 7 pages into the thread, the review is finally publicly viewable.

Image
https://sfdebris.com/videos/startrek/film12.php
Worffan101
Captain
Posts: 1047
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2018 5:47 pm

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by Worffan101 »

That was some pretty good analysis! Only real question I had was "where's the score?", lol.
User avatar
SabreMau
Officer
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 4:00 am

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by SabreMau »

By definition of being a Christmas show, I think it would be a 0. Annoying Character is probably won by Kirk, and a Burn, Baby, Burn trophy to the Vengeance.
User avatar
Nealithi
Captain
Posts: 1351
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2018 11:41 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Star Trek: Into Darkness

Post by Nealithi »

My thoughts. So many missed opportunities.
I don't need to go into why this movie disappointed me. Others including Chuck have gone over so many of them they don't need repeating.
Points I liked. Someone violating the prime directive for moral reasons. Kirk calling out Pike that his attitude is why he got the Enterprise in the first place. It kinda was. And Kirk examining the evidence and following the villain's plot moments before the ambush. This was Kirk showing the tactical genius he is supposed to have. Let his brief foresight allow him to save Marcus. Let him reason out why the villain went to Qonos. (Steal a ship to fake an attack on the Federation to begin a war.)
Sorry I got off on a disappointment there.
Other thing I liked. SEATBELTS!
Post Reply